Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Is Reach the most casual of all Halos?
  • Subject: Is Reach the most casual of all Halos?
Subject: Is Reach the most casual of all Halos?
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend


Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: Sentox6
You must be -blam!- with me. The grand sum of your "tremendous" amount of work was to pick your own two accounts?

There is no middle finger big enough.
After the qualifications were set by the competitive community, it became clear that without firsthand knowledge of the subject it would be almost impossible to verify if the person was in fact a casual. As is the norm, besides opinion, the competitive players could provide zero examples, perhaps you can change that and present one.

I don't know where you went to school, but I learnt this thing called the base 10 decimal system, where 41 is not "far more" than 56.Forgive my error, it has been corrected to reflect what I meant according to the findings. If there are any other errors or somthing you find to be incorrect, feel free to point it out.


being a casual doesnt mean that person cant have a mic, cant play ranked, etc...

  • 01.01.2012 11:03 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.

You provided yourself and ONLY yourself as your "hard proof". That completely throws out your credibility.

And what "competitive community" members gave you this definition, hm?

  • 01.01.2012 11:03 PM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: Plunderfuq
After the qualifications were set by the competitive community, it became clear that without firsthand knowledge of the subject it would be almost impossible to verify if the person was in fact a casual.

Translation:
Posted by: Plunderfuq
I bull-blam!- with absolutely zero shame, so I just picked my own accounts and proceded to utterly defile any concept of statistical robustness. Excuse me while I teabag the corpse of appropriate sample sizes some more.


I find your results somewhat interesting too:

Point 2. The amount of kills for Reach surpasses Halo 3 by over a hundred kills.

Point 3. The W/L is drasticly different between both games, with far more wins in Reach over Halo 3, which might lead to further examination.

So, basically, it was easier for you to get kills in Reach (even if you had to sacrifice yourself to do so: ergo you were able to make bad choices and still trade), and you won more. Thus the obvious conclusion is...

The belief that Reach is a "casual" freindly game appears to be false
Not this.

[Edited on 01.01.2012 11:08 PM PST]

  • 01.01.2012 11:08 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.

OP has no idea what "statistics" means.

  • 01.01.2012 11:09 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: B Rye
This is pretty much what I wanted to say, exactly. OP's "hard proof" is to use his own two gamertags. His Halo 3 tag, he played last year, January 2011, so it wasn't even proper Halo 3.


Forgive the incorrect statement, it has been fixed. As to your point, while the 100 games were not played in its prime, the players that remained in Halo 3 post Reach were most likely more experienced players than the first 100 played in Reach, who were all learning a new game. This would not bode well for Halo 3.

Providing one point of data to claim fact is like saying "Oh, the brakes failed on my car, so all brakes everywhere must be faulty". Science doesn't work like that, buddy.

If as it is suggested, that Reach is in fact the most casual game, it would be very difficult to provide any hard numbers that show otherwise. Perhaps using the criteria provided by the competitive community listed in the body, you can provide a canadite that qualifies. Not every qualification must be met but most and the most important is not playing through the transition from Halo 3 to Reach seemlessly

Also, OP's retarded. He's retarded over at the 343 forums and he's retarded here.Thats not very nice and does not further the conversation in the least.

[Edited on 01.01.2012 11:20 PM PST]

  • 01.01.2012 11:17 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: B Rye
You provided yourself and ONLY yourself as your "hard proof". That completely throws out your credibility.

And what "competitive community" members gave you this definition, hm?
Which qualification do you have a problem with?

  • 01.01.2012 11:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.


Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: B Rye
You provided yourself and ONLY yourself as your "hard proof". That completely throws out your credibility.

And what "competitive community" members gave you this definition, hm?
Which qualification do you have a problem with?

How about the one example (yourself at that) proves your point?

  • 01.01.2012 11:20 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: RC Clone

Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: B Rye
You provided yourself and ONLY yourself as your "hard proof". That completely throws out your credibility.

And what "competitive community" members gave you this definition, hm?
Which qualification do you have a problem with?

How about the one example (yourself at that) proves your point?
How so the K/D ratio is almost identical.

  • 01.01.2012 11:21 PM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: Plunderfuq
How so the K/D ratio is almost identical.

As I have pointed out, regardless of the K/D ratio being virtually the same, you were able to trade kills more often and win significantly more often in Reach.

I feel bad even dignifying this farce, though. You cannot draw any conclusions from one data point. You just simply cannot.

[Edited on 01.01.2012 11:24 PM PST]

  • 01.01.2012 11:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.

Because one sample is nowhere near enough. I have you ever heard of observer bias? Well using yourself like that is basically taking observer bias and multiplying it by infinity.

Are we only supposed to argue against you using your own stats? This thread's basis is ridiculous and you are clueless if you think you using yourself to prove your own point means you're right.

  • 01.01.2012 11:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend

As I said before, a casual isnt someone who never plays ranked, MLG, etc...

A casual is someone who doesnt take the game seriously. Just because someone is a casual doesnt mean that they cant be good, or ranked highly, it just means they dont care about it.

Your qualifications can only be met by maybe a handful of people, and you only used said data to support your theory by using your own accounts.

  • 01.01.2012 11:25 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.

Where did you get your operational definition of a "casual", OP?

  • 01.01.2012 11:26 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: Sentox6
You must be -blam!- with me. The grand sum of your "tremendous" amount of work was to pick your own two accounts?

There is no middle finger big enough.
After the qualifications were set by the competitive community, it became clear that without firsthand knowledge of the subject it would be almost impossible to verify if the person was in fact a casual. As is the norm, besides opinion, the competitive players could provide zero examples, perhaps you can change that and present one.

I don't know where you went to school, but I learnt this thing called the base 10 decimal system, where 41 is not "far more" than 56.Forgive my error, it has been corrected to reflect what I meant according to the findings. If there are any other errors or somthing you find to be incorrect, feel free to point it out.


being a casual doesnt mean that person cant have a mic, cant play ranked, etc...
Those are generalities and every single qualifications need not be met, that is just a guide line. It just so happens that I meet every single one, but if someone played a little ranked and uses a mic, this does not disqualify someone outright.

  • 01.01.2012 11:27 PM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: B Rye
Where did you get your operational definition of a "casual", OP?

From an unnamed consortium of competitive players.







Living up the OP's ass.

  • 01.01.2012 11:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend


Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: Sentox6
You must be -blam!- with me. The grand sum of your "tremendous" amount of work was to pick your own two accounts?

There is no middle finger big enough.
After the qualifications were set by the competitive community, it became clear that without firsthand knowledge of the subject it would be almost impossible to verify if the person was in fact a casual. As is the norm, besides opinion, the competitive players could provide zero examples, perhaps you can change that and present one.

I don't know where you went to school, but I learnt this thing called the base 10 decimal system, where 41 is not "far more" than 56.Forgive my error, it has been corrected to reflect what I meant according to the findings. If there are any other errors or somthing you find to be incorrect, feel free to point it out.


being a casual doesnt mean that person cant have a mic, cant play ranked, etc...
Those are generalities and every single qualifications need not be met, that is just a guide line. It just so happens that I meet every single one, but if someone played a little ranked and uses a mic, this does not disqualify someone outright.


thats the point, you used data plots, and generalizations to make yourself the perfect candidate, rather than using someone of unbiased opinion.

Also bookshelf fit perfectly into the mold, being a casual reach and H3 player, yet faring significantly better in reach.

There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3. Yet you disqualify bookshelf for playing ranked....

  • 01.01.2012 11:30 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: B Rye
Where did you get your operational definition of a "casual", OP?
7 months of observation on two forums and about two weeks of attempting to gather community consensus via asking directly "what makes a casual a casual?". If you feel that there is anything missing or somthing that is wrong about the qualifications, feel free to provide input.

  • 01.01.2012 11:31 PM PDT

"The truth is the key, and with it, I will unlock the doors of darkness and find justice."
-Me

"Why is it that lately, all I want to do is cry?"
-Phoenix Wright


Posted by: meagsIZbeast
There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3.

I'm an inverted case. Look at my Ranked stats in Halo 3 and my stats in Halo Reach... I say I do better in 3.

Of course, I'm just a measly 1 compared to the thousands.

  • 01.01.2012 11:33 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.


Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: B Rye
Where did you get your operational definition of a "casual", OP?
7 months of observation on two forums and about two weeks of attempting to gather community consensus via asking directly "what makes a casual a casual?". If you feel that there is anything missing or somthing that is wrong about the qualifications, feel free to provide input.


So you operational definition is what you think you gathered indirectly from both forums, and directly from the 343 forums.

Wait, you used the 343 forums to try to get the true "competitive community"'s opinion? You dun goofed.

  • 01.01.2012 11:33 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.


Posted by: Akamia179

Of course, I'm just a measly 1 compared to the thousands.


OP doesn't care about that! Hell, that's his main argument!

  • 01.01.2012 11:34 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.

I found this thread in the 343 forums. Of course, it's full of retards that think he's perfect in his methods and his conclusion. I made sure to correct that.

  • 01.01.2012 11:38 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Heroic Member

http://www.bungie.net/fanclub/halohaven/Group/GroupHome.aspx

Join Halo Haven! (Group Leader: A 3 Legged Goat)

(To discuss Halo 4.)

I feel Halo 2 and 3 were the least/most competitive. They could be absolute spray fests with the BR and others, but could also be very competitive, too. Accuracy was critical.

I still feel Reach>3. Simply because I enjoy it more, and I feel it is a more even match up (switch to Halo 3 where I am getting absolutely nailed or I am winning 1v4 by a landslide).

2>CE>Reach>3

PM any reply, let this thread die.

[Edited on 01.01.2012 11:41 PM PST]

  • 01.01.2012 11:39 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.


Posted by: Quantam
Reach is a more even match up (switch to Halo 3 where I am getting absolutely nailed or I am winning 1v4 by a landslide).



Seriously? You get more even matches in Reach than what you got in 3? Or do you mean Halo 3 as it currently is? If you're using current Halo 3 matches, it doesn't count.

  • 01.01.2012 11:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend


Posted by: Akamia179

Posted by: meagsIZbeast
There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3.

I'm an inverted case. Look at my Ranked stats in Halo 3 and my stats in Halo Reach... I say I do better in 3.

Of course, I'm just a measly 1 compared to the thousands.


actually your ranked k/d in H3 is a .71, while your arena k/d(the only ranked playlist) is a .72.

Meanwhile your social in H3 is a .54, where as your social in reach is a .62.

Even you are not an exception.

  • 01.01.2012 11:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.

I can play your game too OP.

In Halo 3 my Ranked K/D was 1.16
In Reach my overall is 1.29

Reach is more casual.

There I beat you and there is nothing you can do to disprove my stats because the only stats that can disprove mine are mine.

I win.

  • 01.01.2012 11:43 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Heroic Member

http://www.bungie.net/fanclub/halohaven/Group/GroupHome.aspx

Join Halo Haven! (Group Leader: A 3 Legged Goat)

(To discuss Halo 4.)


Posted by: RC Clone
I can play your game too OP.

In Halo 3 my Ranked K/D was 1.16
In Reach my overall is 1.29

Reach is more casual.

There I beat you and there is nothing you can do to disprove my stats because the only stats that can disprove mine are mine.

I win.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you don't come under the OPs defintion of casual, since you are on a forum.

  • 01.01.2012 11:45 PM PDT